|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Standards track, Proposed Standard RFC. Errata exist.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
In VSS, for the RTP-based elementary stream packaging of video/audio data, the RTP payload format for H.264 is specified in IETF RFC 6184.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=6184
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 6184 has been in existence since May 2011. This text is a Proposed Standard. This document has been reviewed extensively in IETF.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC is a standards-track document and is currently in the "Proposed Standard" state. Obsoletes RFC 3984.Errata exist.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
H.241 defines the procedures for use of advanced video codecs, including Rec. H.264, with H.300 series terminals.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
Normative References /
/
[1] ITU-T Recommendation H.264, "Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services", March 2010./
/
[2] ISO/IEC International Standard 14496-10:2008./
/
[3] ITU-T Recommendation H.241, "Extended video procedures and control signals for H.300-series terminals", May 2006./
/
[4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
/
[5] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003./
/
[6] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006./
/
[7] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006./
/
[8] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 2002./
/
[9] Lennox, J., Ott, J., and T. Schierl, "Source-Specific Media Attributes in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 5576, June 2009./
/
Informative References /
/
[10] Luthra, A., Sullivan, G.J., and T. Wiegand (eds.), "Introduction to the special issue on the H.264/AVC video coding standard", IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 13, No. 7, July 2003./
/
[11] Ott, J., Bormann, C., Sullivan, G., Wenger, S., and R. Even, Ed., "RTP Payload Format for ITU-T Rec. H.263 Video", RFC 4629, January 2007./
/
[12] ISO/IEC International Standard 14496-2:2004./
/
[13] Wenger, S., "H.264/AVC over IP", IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 13, No. 7, July 2003./
/
[14] Wenger, S., "H.26L over IP: The IP-Network Adaptation Layer", Proceedings Packet Video Workshop, April 2002./
/
[15] Stockhammer, T., Hannuksela, M.M., and S. Wenger, "H.26L/JVT Coding Network Abstraction Layer and IP-Based Transport", IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2002), Rochester, NY, September 2002./
/
[16] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551, July 2003./
/
[17] ITU-T Recommendation H.223, "Multiplexing protocol for low bit rate multimedia communication", July 2001./
/
[18] Li, A., Ed., "RTP Payload Format for Generic Forward Error Correction", RFC 5109, December 2007./
/
[19] Stockhammer, T., Wiegand, T., Oelbaum, T., and F. Obermeier, "Video Coding and Transport Layer Techniques for H.264/AVC- Based Transmission over Packet-Lossy Networks", IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2003), Barcelona, Spain, September 2003./
/
[20] Varsa, V. and M. Karczewicz, "Slice interleaving in compressed video packetization", Packet Video Workshop 2000./
/
[21] Kang, S.H. and A. Zakhor, "Packet scheduling algorithm for wireless video streaming", Packet Video Workshop 2002./
/
[22] Hannuksela, M.M., "Enhanced Concept of GOP", JVT-B042, available http://ftp3.itu.int/av-arch/video-site/0201_Gen/JVT- B042.doc, January 2002./
/
[23] Wenger, S., "Video Redundancy Coding in H.263+", 1997 International Workshop on Audio-Visual Services over Packet Networks, September 1997./
/
[24] Wang, Y.-K., Hannuksela, M.M., and M. Gabbouj, "Error Resilient Video Coding Using Unequally Protected Key Pictures", in Proc. International Workshop VLBV03, September 2003./
/
[25] van der Meer, J., Mackie, D., Swaminathan, V., Singer, D., and P. Gentric, "RTP Payload Format for Transport of MPEG-4 Elementary Streams", RFC 3640, November 2003./
/
[26] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 3711, March 2004./
/
[27] Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., and R. Lanphier, "Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP)", RFC 2326, April 1998./
/
[28] Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session Announcement Protocol", RFC 2974, October 2000./
/
[29] Westerlund, M. and S. Wenger, "RTP Topologies", RFC 5117, January 2008./
/
[30] Wenger, S., Chandra, U., Westerlund, M., and B. Burman, "Codec Control Messages in the RTP Audio-Visual Profile with Feedback (AVPF)", RFC 5104, February 2008.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
References should always be made to RFC numbers (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References not to be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
|
